WASHINGTON --The Federal Election Commission has recently made public action on four matters previously under review (MURs).In MUR 5526, the Graf for Congress committee paid a $2,400 civil penalty for failing to put disclaimers on campaign signs.

In MUR 5588, the Arizona Republican Party paid a $2,300 civil penalty for failing to accurately report an independent expenditure on behalf of the Bush-Cheney ’04 committee.

In MUR 5502 the Commission dismissed a complaint filed against the Martinez for Senate committee after an investigation found no evidence of coordination between the Martinez committee and the Bush-Cheney ’04 committee.

The Commission dismissed a complaint against the Stephanie Summers O’Neal for Congress committee because the committee is eligible for termination due to lack of activity and based on priorities and resources relative to other matters pending on the Commission’s docket.

The complainant alleged that Graf for Congress, the authorized committee for Randy Graf’s 2004 Congressional race in Arizona, violated the disclaimer provisions in four separate communications. The Graf committee did not deny that it violated the Act , but stated it had no intention of violating any Commission rules or regulations. The Respondent’s signed a conciliation agreement in which they agreed to pay a $2,400 civil penalty.

DOCUMENTS ON PUBLIC RECORD:

Documents from this matter are available from the Commission’s web site at http://www.fec.gov by entering 5526 under case number in the Enforcement Query System. They are also available in the FEC’s Public Records Office at 999 E St. NW in Washington.

The complaint alleged that the Arizona Republican Party (“ARP”) funded pre-recorded telephone calls expressly advocating the re-election of President George W. Bush which qualified as either a contribution to or an independent expenditure on behalf of Bush-Cheney ’04. The ARP stated this activity was completely independent, with no coordination with President Bush, any agent for the candidate or the committee. The respondents signed a conciliation agreement in which they paid a $2,300 civil penalty for failing to accurately report independent expenditures.

DOCUMENTS ON PUBLIC RECORD:

Documents from this matter are available from the Commission’s web site at http://www.fec.gov by entering 5588 under case number in the Enforcement Query System. They are also available in the FEC’s Public Records Office at 999 E St. NW in Washington.

The complaint alleged that Martinez for Senate, the campaign committee for Mel Martinez’s 2004 Senate race in Florida, coordinated advertising with Bush-Cheney ’04, Inc. through a common media vendor, The Stevens and Schriefer Group, for making excessive in-kind contributions to the Bush Committee. Martinez for Senate contended that Stevens-Schriefer was not a common vendor because the “campaign erected a wall around” Stevens-Schriefer “and retained a separate media vendor, Red October Productions, to handle any communications mentioning the President.” The Commission ultimately found no reason to believe the Martinez committee violated the law because neither Stevens-Schriefer nor Red October used or conveyed to the Martinez campaign information pertaining to the plans, projects, activities or needs of the Bush campaign that was material to the creation, production, or distribution of the Martinez advertisements. The Commission took no action with respect to the Bush-Cheney ’04 committee.

DOCUMENTS ON PUBLIC RECORD:

Documents from this matter are available from the Commission’s web site at http://www.fec.gov by entering 5502 under case number in the Enforcement Query System. They are also available in the FEC’s Public Records Office at 999 E St. NW in Washington.

The complainant alleged that the committee failed to file an October 2005 quarterly report listing outstanding debts, filed a termination report that covered numerous reporting periods, and failed to amend their Statement of Organization when they changed treasurers. The Commission decided to exercise its prosecutorial discretion and dismiss the case because the committee is eligible for administrative termination due to lack of activity and based on the Commission’s priorities and resources relative to other matters pending before the Commission.

*The Enforcement Priority System (EPS) rates all incoming cases against objective criteria to determine whether they warrant use of the Commission’s limited resources.

Cases dismissed under EPS fall into two categories: low rated and stale cases. Low rated cases are those that do no warrant use of the Commission’s resources to pursue because of their lower significance relative to other pending matters.

DOCUMENTS ON PUBLIC RECORD:

Documents from this matter are available from theCommission’s web site at http://www.fec.gov by entering 5686R under case numbers in the Enforcement Query System. They are also available in the FEC’s Public Records Office at 999 E St. NW in Washington.

There are four administrative stages to the FEC enforcement process:

1. Receipt of proper complaint

3. “Probable cause” stage

2. “Reason to believe” stage

4. Conciliation stage

It requires the votes of at least four of the six Commissioners to take any action. The FEC can close a case at any point after reviewing a complaint. If a violation is found and conciliation cannot be reached, then the FEC can institute a civil court action against a respondent.